Guest guest Posted November 8, 2008 Report Share Posted November 8, 2008 The tantra shAstra There has been a lot of ill-informed criticism of the tantra with the result that it has been very much misunderstood. Those who wish to know what tantra really is, are advised to study the works of Sir John Woodroffe (also known as Arthur Avalon) on this subject. He was a Judge of the Calcutta High Court during the British rule. He made a thorough study of tantra and came to be accepted as an authority on the subject by even traditional Indian Pandits. Some points from his Introduction to his work entitled Principles of tantra are given below. In India philosophy and religion are mingled in a way which the West has not known since the age when philosophy was held to be Ancilla Theologiae. We have in the tantra the recognition of the fine principle that this doctrine and its expression in ritual are for all, whatever be their race, caste or sex. The shUdra and woman are under none of the vaidik bans. The tantra calls woman 'shakti'. To ill-treat a shakti is a crime. On this ground the mahAnirvANa tantra forbids sati (the self-immolation of the wife in the funeral pyre of her husband). It says: " O kuleshAnI, a wife should not be burnt with her dead husband. Every woman is Thy image. That woman who in her delusion ascends the funeral pyre of her lord shall go to hell " . (Ch.X, verses 79-80). A woman can be a Guru, and initiation by her achieves increased benefit. The main subjects of Tantra are mantra and sAdhana in all its forms. The kulArNava Tantra says: " For each yuga a suitable shAstra is given-- in satyayuga shruti; in treta smRiti; in dvApara the purANas; in kali the tantra. tantra has been said to exist in the Veda as the perfume exists in the flower. While the theoretical portion of the gAyatri tattva is contained in vedanta, the practical and ritualistic portion is in the tantra. If it be argued that the tantra is of recent origin because it provides for the worship of shakti, then the same would apply to the purANas, mahAbhArata and even the vedas and upanishads. In the veda there is the sarasvati sUkta, in the yajurveda the lakShmi sUkta and in the Rigveda the devi sUkta. MAdhavAcharya, the commentator on the vedas, has, in dealing with the Patanjali darshana quoted passages from the tantra shAstra with reference to the ten forms of samskAras prescribed therein. The bala and atibala mantras mentioned in rAmAyaNa, bAlakANDa, are tantrik and the mode of acquiring them is given in the tantra shAstra. Just like the vedas, the tantras have no author, but have emanated from the mouths of shiva and His consort pArvatI. Those which came from shiva are known as 'Agama' and those that came from pArvati are known as 'nigama'. The worship performed in temples is mainly Tantrik. shruti is of two kinds--- vaidik and tantrik. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2008 Report Share Posted November 9, 2008 Thank you very much, Shri Sastri-ji, for this! I have read Avalon's " The Serpent Power " . No claims that I have understood it well. Still, no doubt, it is just brilliant. The pains, hard work and honest research that had gone into the writing of the masterpiece are non-pareil. Your post also places the role and importance of women in ancient India in the right perspective. Best regards. Madathil Nair ______________ advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote: > There has been a lot of ill-informed criticism of the tantra with the > result that it has been very much misunderstood. Those who wish to know what > tantra really is, are advised to study the works of Sir John Woodroffe (also > known as Arthur Avalon) on this subject. ........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2008 Report Share Posted November 9, 2008 With reference to Sri Sastri's post on the tantra: Historically, the vedic mantra-shaastra continued to develop even after the vedic canon was formalized, and this " fresh " mantra-shaastra, often devoted to particular deities, came to be known as tantra. It has very little to do with " status of women " and other modern social concerns. Hence there are shaiva, shaakta, vaiShNava, kaumAra, gANapatya and saura tantra-s, even ayyappa tantra-s. Given that most tantra-s are sectarian (in the sense of being devoted to a particular deity), they are usually given " shruti " status only by the respective sects. Most tantra-s have portions devoted to mantra, yoga, jnAna and AcAra (conduct) which are important for their respective followers. The vedic smArta tradition (of which advaita-vedAnta is a part) is not sectarian in the sense that it acknowledges all the vedic deities. The smArta-s do not usually consider the tantra-s as equivalent to the veda, and uphold the vedic system of AcAra over that proposed by any of the tantra-s. However, the mantra, yoga and (in some cases) the jnAna portions of the tantra-s are accepted as valid by many smArta-s. The sha~Nkara maTha-s also preserve certain forms of tantra, most notably shrIvidyA, which is represented by texts such as prapa~ncasAra, saundaryalaharI (both attributed to sha~Nkara bhagavatpAda), tripura rahasya, etc. The smArta-s in general have preserved the tantra through the compilation of authoritative mantra-shAstra digests, such as the mantra-mahodadhi, the shrIvidyArNava and the tantra-samuccaya. 2008/11/8 S.N. Sastri <sn.sastri > > The tantra shAstra -- santoShaH paramo lAbhaH satsa~NgaH paramA gatiH I vicAraH paramaM j~nAnaM shamo hi paramaM sukham II - yoga vAsiShTha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2008 Report Share Posted November 10, 2008 Namaste Rameshji, I need clarification please. If the Vaidikas (vedic adherents) do not view the tantra as shruti, then what is our take on temple worship and its upacaras? Such a view would imply that tantras/agamas that serve as a pramana for temple affairs were man-made and therefore paurusheya. How would this affect the devotion and faith of Vedantins? Thanks and pranamas, Kathirasan On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Ramesh Krishnamurthy <rkmurthy wrote: > With reference to Sri Sastri's post on the tantra: > > Historically, the vedic mantra-shaastra continued to develop even > after the vedic canon was formalized, and this " fresh " > mantra-shaastra, often devoted to particular deities, came to be known > as tantra. It has very little to do with " status of women " and other > modern social concerns. > > Hence there are shaiva, shaakta, vaiShNava, kaumAra, gANapatya and > saura tantra-s, even ayyappa tantra-s. > > Given that most tantra-s are sectarian (in the sense of being devoted > to a particular deity), they are usually given " shruti " status only by > the respective sects. > > Most tantra-s have portions devoted to mantra, yoga, jnAna and AcAra > (conduct) which are important for their respective followers. > > The vedic smArta tradition (of which advaita-vedAnta is a part) is not > sectarian in the sense that it acknowledges all the vedic deities. The > smArta-s do not usually consider the tantra-s as equivalent to the > veda, and uphold the vedic system of AcAra over that proposed by any > of the tantra-s. However, the mantra, yoga and (in some cases) the > jnAna portions of the tantra-s are accepted as valid by many smArta-s. > > The sha~Nkara maTha-s also preserve certain forms of tantra, most > notably shrIvidyA, which is represented by texts such as > prapa~ncasAra, saundaryalaharI (both attributed to sha~Nkara > bhagavatpAda), tripura rahasya, etc. The smArta-s in general have > preserved the tantra through the compilation of authoritative > mantra-shAstra digests, such as the mantra-mahodadhi, the > shrIvidyArNava and the tantra-samuccaya. > > 2008/11/8 S.N. Sastri <sn.sastri >> >> The tantra shAstra > -- > santoShaH paramo lAbhaH satsa~NgaH paramA gatiH I > vicAraH paramaM j~nAnaM shamo hi paramaM sukham II > - yoga vAsiShTha > > -- Kathirasan Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2008 Report Share Posted November 10, 2008 Namaste Kathirasan-ji, The shruti status of the tantra-s is somewhat nebulous. It is only the sectarian followers of a particular tantric system who seem to clearly identify their source tantra-s as shruti. The smArta-s, as I said in my last mail, generally accept the mantra, yoga and sometimes the jnAna portions of the tantra-s as valid but not the AcAra. But they don't seem to have a clear take on the tantra-s being shruti. Some authorities seem to accept it, but generally the term shruti refers to veda rather than tantra. But I don't see what your actual doubt is. The bhagavad gItA or the vivekacUDAmaNi are clearly not accepted as shruti, but that has not prevented them from being very important texts. Ramesh 2008/11/10 Kathirasan K <brahmasatyam: > Namaste Rameshji, > > I need clarification please. > > If the Vaidikas (vedic adherents) do not view the tantra as shruti, > then what is our take on temple worship and its upacaras? Such a view > would imply that tantras/agamas that serve as a pramana for temple > affairs were man-made and therefore paurusheya. How would this > affect the devotion and faith of Vedantins? > > Thanks and pranamas, > Kathirasan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.